View methods side by side.
Choose up to four methods. Add them using the search and share the comparison by copying its link.
| Criterion |  Engineering Kanban |  Product Strategy Lean Canvas |  Systems Thinking Future Reality Tree |  Systems Thinking Intervention Mapping |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Purposedifferent | When work sits in too many parallel streams, throughput suffers and no one sees the bottlenecks. Kanban makes the flow of work visible and limits overload so a system becomes calmer and more predictable. | When an early product bet still has too many open points, it brings target group, problem, and assumptions into a single view. It condenses the idea so core risks become nameable. | A Future Reality Tree shows how desired actions are meant to lead to a better system state. The method checks whether a path of change holds together logically before time flows into implementation. | Intervention Mapping translates a need for change into a planned, evaluable program. The method connects target group, determinants, actions, and measurement into a traceable chain. |
Complexitydifferent | Medium | Medium | High | High |
Timedifferent | Ongoing | 45-90 min | 2-4 h | 1-5 Tage |
Participantsdifferent | 2-12 | 1-6 | 3-8 | 4-12 |
Formatdifferent | Workshop + async | Workshop + async | Workshop | Workshop + async |
Outputdifferent | Kanban board, WIP policies, Flow metrics | Lean Canvas, Core Assumptions, Experiment Backlog | Future Reality Tree, Negative Branches, Assumption List, Improved Injections | Logic Model, Change Objectives, Intervention Components, Evaluation Plan |
Tagsno overlap | FlowVisual managementDelivery | StartupLeanAssumptionsBusiness model | Theory of ConstraintsSystems thinkingChange | ChangeSystems thinkingCapability |